2010Current Medical Research and OpinionRequires access

Sublingual zolpidem in early onset of sleep compared to oral zolpidem: polysomnographic study in patients with primary insomnia

Corinne Staner, Frédéric Joly, Nathalie Jacquot, Irina D. Vlasova, Maria Nehlin, Thomas Lundqvist, Charlotte Edenius, Luc Staner

Open publisher page 15 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the hypnotic effects of a single dose of a sublingual formulation of zolpidem (Edluar*) 10 mg vs oral formulation (Ambien dagger ) 10 mg by polysomnography (PSG) in DSM-IV primary insomnia patients. Primary objective was to compare the two formulations on sleep induction, measured by latency to persistent sleep (LPS), sleep onset latency (SOL) and latency to stage 1 (ST1L). RESEARCH AND METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, two-period, cross-over multi-centre study in which each period comprised two successive PSG recording nights. Treatment was administered when PSG recordings started. Subjective sleep and residual effects were assessed the next morning. RESULTS: Seventy female and male patients aged 19-64 were analysed. Sublingual zolpidem significantly shortened LPS by 34% or 10.3 minutes as compared to oral zolpidem (95% CI: -4.3 min to -16.2 min, p = 0.001). SOL and ST1L were also significantly shortened (p < 0.01). Furthermore the two formulations were comparable in terms of sleep maintenance properties based on total sleep time (TST). The improvement in subjective sleep and next-day residual effects did not differ between the two treatments. Both routes of administration were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that sublingual zolpidem is superior to an equivalent dose of oral zolpidem in terms of sleep inducing properties in a carefully selected sample of primary insomnia patients.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To compare the hypnotic effects of a single dose of a sublingual formulation of zolpidem (Edluar*) 10 mg vs oral formulation (Ambien dagger ) 10 mg by polysomnography (PSG) in DSM-IV primary insomnia patients. Primary objective was to compare the two formulations on sleep induction, measured by latency to persistent sleep (LPS), sleep onset latency (SOL) and latency to stage 1 (ST1L). RESEARCH AND METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, two-period, cross-over multi-centre study in which each period comprised two successive PSG recording nights. Treatment was administered when PSG recordings started. Subjective sleep and residual effects were assessed the next morning. RESULTS: Seventy female and male patients aged 19-64 were analysed. Sublingual zolpidem significantly shortened LPS by 34% or 10.3 minutes as compared to oral zolpidem (95% CI: -4.3 min to -16.2 min, p = 0.001). SOL and ST1L were also significantly shortened (p < 0.01). Furthermore the two formulations were comparable in terms of sleep maintenance properties based on total sleep time (TST). The improvement in subjective sleep and next-day residual effects did not differ between the two treatments. Both routes of administration were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that sublingual zolpidem is superior to an equivalent dose of oral zolpidem in terms of sleep inducing properties in a carefully selected sample of primary insomnia patients.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 15 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the hypnotic effects of a single dose of a sublingual formulation of zolpidem (Edluar*) 10 mg vs oral formulation (Ambien dagger ) 10 mg by polysomnography (PSG) in DSM-IV primary insomnia patients. Primary objective was to compare the two formulations on sleep induction, measured by latency to persistent sleep (LPS), sleep onset latency (SOL) and latency to stage 1 (ST1L). RESEARCH AND METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, two-period, cross-over multi-centre study in which each period comprised two successive PSG recording nights. Treatment was administered when PSG recordings started. Subjective sleep and residual effects were assessed the next morning. RESULTS: Seventy female and male patients aged 19-64 were analysed. Sublingual zolpidem significantly shortened LPS by 34% or 10.3 minutes as compared to oral zolpidem (95% CI: -4.3 min to -16.2 min, p = 0.001). SOL and ST1L were also significantly shortened (p < 0.01). Furthermore the two formulations were comparable in terms of sleep maintenance properties based on total sleep time (TST). The improvement in subjective sleep and next-day residual effects did not differ between the two treatments. Both routes of administration were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that sublingual zolpidem is superior to an equivalent dose of oral zolpidem in terms of sleep inducing properties in a carefully selected sample of primary insomnia patients.

Key concepts: Zolpidem, Medicine, Primary Insomnia, Polysomnography, Insomnia, Anesthesia, Sleep onset, Sleep onset latency

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Sublingual zolpidem in early onset of sleep compared to oral zolpidem: polysomnographic study in patients with primary insomnia — Research Paper | ScholarLens